Martha Coakley is a dogged hardworking human being. That’s her only sin. Those of you still wondering what she stands for can finally open your eyes: she stands for an honest days pay for an honest days work and y’all could have seen that from day one if you’d have bothered. Open your eyes, or have them opened for you by the contrast of the coming Baker Administration. If we’re lucky, we’ll get five actual minutes of governance before he wanders away like his political patrons Weld and Cellucci. Hello, Acting-Governor Polito, the second coming of Jane Swift and the hardest-hitting dumbass north of the Mason-Dixon line. Meanwhile, DeLeo and his cronies will carve up the CommonWealth in the absence of an executive who can differentiate between their ass and their elbow.
I’ve been lurking here all day watching people decry how completely politics is broken and, only half-a-beat away, decry Martha Coakley for not being broken enough to win it. Many of you are going in three different directions at once and some of you aren’t even attempting to be subtle about it. Those of you who think Martha Coakley’s a lousy candidate have yet to explain how she became a candidate in the first place, oh so many years ago… Y’all talk as if she erupted, fully formed, out of the head of John Silber and was promptly annointed the heiress, forthwith. It didn’t happen that way… and those of you thinking Maura Healey’s trajectory is going to be at all different are in for a rather unsettling shock. Those of you who think that politicians owe you some form of ‘inspiration’ should grow up. Inspire yourself or STFU.
Martha Coakley ran a near flawless campaign. She did everything right. She had her primary opponents visibly supporting her. She was wrapped in a bear hug with Deval Patrick and Elizabeth Warren. She ran with her own protege, Maura Healey, out in front. She was ON FIRE at the debates. GOTV was phenomenal. She did almost nothing wrong. And her campaign, dogged, assured and forthright would have been exactly how she would have governed the CommonWealth.
But we don’t want dogged, assured and forthright. We want flash and high oratory and ‘inspiration’ and Lord knows what all… A goodly sized portion of the CommonWealth, and indeed some of y’all here, would, I daresay, rather be lied to cunningly and with panache — indeed outrightly manipulated– than to countenance real and honest talk. That’s why Martha Coakley didn’t win: you don’t want a governor, you want a messianic daddy figure to tell you everything is going to be alright. So fuck all y’all. It ain’t. Grow up.
I’m proud to have cast my vote for Martha Coakley. I’d do it again even if I knew the outcome would not change. I’ll vote for an ordinary striving hard working human being and lose over a sure win with a ridiculous slice of painted cardboard like Charlie Baker any day and three times on Sunday. Charlie Baker has won the prize: for him, the prize was getting there. He don’t give a dry french fart about actually doing the job and he’ll quickly prove that. He’s never earned an honest days pay in his entire life and he ain’t about to start now…
Martha Coakley earned everything she has and she deserves the Governorship: That she doesn’t have the governorship is your shame, not hers.
Martha Coakley does, however, have my respect and admiration.
I never had the motivation to block her and vote strategically in the primary like some did and I was happy to vote for her in the general. However, it seems like some of takedownbrown2012’s shoulder chip has rubbed off on you, which isn’t attractive.
It was deeply flawed. She should have cleaned up, but the campaign actively refused to provide any sort of vision for MA. Many of us saw that in the primary and hammered away at it. The response always seemed to be “suck it up” or, even better, “what are you going to do, vote for Baker?”
That she lost this race was not at all surprising.
Coakley and her advisors learned many lessons from 2010, but not nearly enough.
Well, THAT has been the case since either 1980 or 1968, dependent on how you tally up history.
As for Coakley, I appreciate your passionate take on her campaign. It’s difficult for anyone to punch a national or regional narrative these days given how inept the Fourth Estate has become. The press literally doesn’t even bother to present the candidates’ central arguments on the issues.
Yet Coakley engaged in a campaign that, from start to finish, centered on an “I’ll fight for you” message that lacked teeth. She didn’t really come to the table with many signature ideas. She also did a poor job of putting forth a compelling economic vision to Baker’s economic bromides. I voted for her, but I was hardly enthusiastic about it. Mind you, I don’t subscribe to the notion that I should be swept off my feet by the available candidates in order to pull the lever.
The people who show up win. Coakley needed to do a better job of convincing people that a vote for her would be a win for them.
Wow.
Nah.
As if validates their non-support.
Congrats of your candidate’s victory, you deserve it.